Ah right (wrt conservative players), figured it might have just been the ones I'd seen.

The thing about people on twitter being all "OMG SO STUPID" is great, particulary when it's clearly just someone wanking themselves off about knowing something rather than having thought if it's actually common knowledge.

Yea I don't think any team has a chance if The Chaser is getting them all right. I remember weeks ago watching Anne Hegerty losing when she had about 3 steps needed with a minute left, 'the team' is very much a secondary factor to The Chaser - they only have an input on the outcome if The Chaser allows them to. The typical target of 18-19 steps they'll get in barely over a minute if they're just reeling the answers off.

Jordan F wrote:Alan was on both Pointless and The Chase today. I find that weird.

It is really weird - especially as the application form AND audition stages for BOTH shows check and then re-check TV appearance information to make sure this sort of thing doesn't happen across the same week or two, let alone on the same day.

Yea. But that's not the angle you're describing, you're describing the line. It's a sort of vague trick question, which is weird for this program. Anne got it wrong - went with one of the angle names (obtuse or something like that).

Matt Morrison wrote:I expect "straight angle" would have been accepted without hesitation too.

It should have been given as the answer. I just don't understand where Craig's coming from with his 'trick question' angle (lol).

I expect it was THE answer. We'll never know as it wasn't passed (if it had been Bradley might have said "straight angle"). The contestant said "straight line" and if that was deemed to be good enough (which I think we're agreeing it is, yes?) then there is no possibility or need in a tightly timed format to confirm the actual expected wording.

Matt Morrison wrote:I expect "straight angle" would have been accepted without hesitation too.

It should have been given as the answer. I just don't understand where Craig's coming from with his 'trick question' angle (lol).

I expect it was THE answer. We'll never know as it wasn't passed (if it had been Bradley might have said "straight angle"). The contestant said "straight line" and if that was deemed to be good enough (which I think we're agreeing it is, yes?) then there is no possibility or need in a tightly timed format to confirm the actual expected wording.

He said someone got it wrong, didn't he?

Edit: ah wait, I think I understand what happened now - chaser got it wrong on the final chase, so contestant answered with 'straight line' and was marked correct? I suppose you could make a case that 'straight line' shouldn't have been accepted, but still - 'trick question'? wtf?

Haven't really watched The Chase that much, but reading about the tactics of dropping above, do you think there is scope for tinkering with the game? Something like, in addition to the money, you'd also have a number of steps for the end game (basically it's just +1 for all at the moment, could the lower or higher monetary amounts also be worth more or less steps?) - or maybe you could purchase steps from your prize fund before the final chase?

Jon Corby wrote:Haven't really watched The Chase that much, but reading about the tactics of dropping above, do you think there is scope for tinkering with the game? Something like, in addition to the money, you'd also have a number of steps for the end game (basically it's just +1 for all at the moment, could the lower or higher monetary amounts also be worth more or less steps?) - or maybe you could purchase steps from your prize fund before the final chase?

Good idea. Never thought of that. It would work good say to reduce the higher offer slightly but have a +1 (so 2 steps head start) if you get back Home. And then -1 step too. That definitely would discourage dropping down a lot more and increase risk taking too. The number of steps would be more of an incentive for me and would definitely deter me from dropping.

Michael Wallace wrote:Steps in the final is a great idea, such a good idea I wouldn't be too surprised to see it introduced at some point. Can any regular viewers give rough estimates of how many people go low/high?

Michael Wallace wrote:Steps in the final is a great idea, such a good idea I wouldn't be too surprised to see it introduced at some point. Can any regular viewers give rough estimates of how many people go low/high?

Craig Beevers wrote:Just want to punch the people who want to 'get home' and go for the middle option which absolutely makes NO MATHEMATICAL SENSE WHATSOEVER.

If you go for the higher offer, you run a higher risk of being caught by the Chaser and losing out on a chance to share in the final prize pot. It's not rocket science.

Also, are you just saying that because the gap between £-1k and £1k is tiny in comparison to the gap between £1k and £40k, so you might as well go for £-1k if you're not going for £40k? I'm not sure that makes logical sense. Someone might pick £1k over £-1k if the third option is £2k. If so, it would be illogical to pick £-1k if you increase the highest option. And the £40k might be too high a risk for them.

Craig Beevers wrote:Just want to punch the people who want to 'get home' and go for the middle option which absolutely makes NO MATHEMATICAL SENSE WHATSOEVER.

If you go for the higher offer, you run a higher risk of being caught by the Chaser and losing out on a chance to share in the final prize pot. It's not rocket science.

Also, are you just saying that because the gap between £-1k and £1k is tiny in comparison to the gap between £1k and £40k, so you might as well go for £-1k if you're not going for £40k? I'm not sure that makes logical sense. Someone might pick £1k over £-1k if the third option is £2k. If so, it would be illogical to pick £-1k if you increase the highest option. And the £40k might be too high a risk for them.

Of course it makes logical sense. I don't know what the odds are exactly of someone being caught, but I'd guess it is around 50-50 if you go for the middle option. Even if you're a good player there's a reasonable chance you'll get caught. Taking a step closer makes it fair bit easier to get home.

It's hard to think of a scenario where you'd favour a prize fund of £15,000 (£5,000 each) over £13,000 (£4,333 each) given the much greater chance you'll get caught and from the other players' point of view their chances of winning also go up with the much better possibility of an extra player.

Going for £15,000 instead of £54,000 just for an extra step also makes no sense whatsoever. I'd say most of those who get home do it with steps to spare. So conservatively speaking you're about half as likely to make it back for more than triple the money.

Whatever your attitude, ability or synergy with other contestants is you should either pick the -1k or the 40k. 2k makes a small percentage change to the prize fund. 40k makes a huge change.

Shame Heather is on the same team as a prick with a stupid moustache hogging all of the tweets. I found 3 tweets 2 of which refer to her being a TILF and the other one liking a griffin with a goose's head.

Ryan Taylor wrote:Shame Heather is on the same team as a prick with a stupid moustache hogging all of the tweets. I found 3 tweets 2 of which refer to her being a TILF and the other one liking a griffin with a goose's head.

OK I take back the prick comment as he's actually pretty funny. His moustache is still stupid though.

Top performance from Heather I thought. Think she would have been better off in the final by herself, given the time wasted by having to buzz and passing. Did herself proud though, good banter, some really cracking answers too.

Michael Wallace wrote:Top performance from Heather I thought. Think she would have been better off in the final by herself, given the time wasted by having to buzz and passing. Did herself proud though, good banter, some really cracking answers too.

(This is how you chat up women, right?)

Yeah. I told Michelle she did really well on the show (even though she only managed a measly 4 wins). Worked for me.

But seriously, well played Heather. Moustache guy was good to watch as well, but you did pretty much all the answering in the final round.

I think Michael has a point, that final round is probably just as difficult with two players as it is with one, maybe more so. Obviously with two players there's more chance one of you will know the answer to a question, but you lose a lot of time. If you're the only one there you can pass immediately if the question is something you've got no clue about, and if you know it you can answer without all that faffing about with the buzzer. You have to wait for your name to be announced too - as I recall, when Ryan was on he answered when someone else had buzzed first, and they disallowed it.

Just watched this - Heather seemed to take a while to warm up in the cash builder round but was absolutely stonking in the final, so well done. Paul's comment that if he won he'd "take this lass on holiday" came across as distinctly creepy I thought - I wonder if he's actually married, or whether his hasty postverb* about his "missus" was a bit of damage limitation.

* A word I just invented to mean the spoken equivalent of a postscript

One of the questions today was "what is the collective term for a group of raccoons". I'm sure we could come up with some more entertaining suggestions than whatever the drearily forgettable answer given on the show was. (That sentence doesn't sound right but I'm too pissed to work out why.)

By the way, I saw a celebrity version of this the other day, and they all got knocked out, but were allowed one person back (Jimmy Carr) for the final chase with £20000 to play for. He was the final person to be knocked out and had taken a step forward to try and get £100,000 and lost. But had he not taken a step forward, he would only have been going for about £5000, so there was no advantage for him at all in "playing safe" and not taking a step forward. Silly game.